Pt.3: Players - Soaker Combat Rules

[isoaker]

Rule Set
---------------------------
3: Players

3.1: Definition
- a Player is defined as an authorized participant in an organized water war
- all Players must be accounted for prior to the start of game
- Option: the defending Team [if using a Team's home battlefield] may conceal the number of Players they have. They may also position such Players anywhere within the battlefield. Teams may also call for reinforcements anytime during a battle. New Players may arrive anytime during the war, but are not considered live until they link up with at least one already-present member of their team. Team Commanders must know the full count of that Team's active Players for final headcount at end game.


3.2: General Rules
- Players are never permitted to aggressively physically come in contact with another Player for any reason; physical aggression shall result in the removal of the offending Player(s) from the game
- Non-Players and/or Referees/Moderators are considered non-combatants and thus must not be attacked or provoked in any way


3.3: Player Conduct
- Players should respect self, other Players, and all non-participants
- Players should be familiar with all the rules of the game and strive to abide by all of them
- all Players should never intentionally damage any other person and/or property and do what they can to minimize the risk of personal or accidental injury


3.4: Player Disputes
- in the event of a dispute, game play should be halted and the dispute discussed until the group can come to an agreement
- Option A: if an agreement cannot be reached quickly (within a few minutes), a replay from approximate previous positions would be called
- Option B: Team Commanders may mutually agree to declare all Players involved in a dispute dead if an agreement cannot be reached. Likewise, they may also declare that all involved remain alive, as if the event did not take place.
- Option C: rely on the Referee/Moderator's decision on the outcome of a disputed action


---------------------------

Note: set will be expanded and modified as members contribute ideas and rules.

[mr. dude]

CTF+1HK
3.1: A player is someone participating in the war (that what you want isoaker?)
3.2:
-No physical contact
-Should you set up traps, none should be dangerous
-Don't shoot at anyone not in the war (unless they want you to)
-Use your common sense, don't put yourself and your friends in danger

[DX]

3.1
- all Players must be accounted for prior to the start of game

I'd suggest adding an option here: the defending team [if using a team's home battlefield] may conceal the number of players they have and may lie. They may also position such players anywhere within the battlefield. Either team may also call for reinforcements anytime during a battle. New players may arrive anytime during the war, but are not considered live until they link up with at least one already-present member of their team.

3.4: Player Disputes
- in the event of a dispute, game play should be halted and the dispute discussed until the group can come to an agreement
- Option A: if an agreement cannot be reached quickly (within a few minutes), a replay from approximate previous positions can be called
- Option B: rely on the referee/moderator's decision

I'd suggest adding an Option C: Team commanders may mutually agree to declare all players involved in a dispute dead if an agreement cannot be reached. Likewise, they may also declare that all involved remain alive, as if the event did not take place.

This issue brings into the chain of command into conflict. Does a ref/mod have the final say over a mutual founder/commander decision? Locally, we've vested executive power over a team to founders and commanders and executive power over the whole war to founders, but then only for joint/mutually agreed-upon actions. This has worked extremely well for 3 seasons so far, though I could see situations when you might want the word of a ref to override that of a founder. Either way, it can be a sensitive issue, as a ref has a huge amount of power. They are two different methods of regulation. The founder system has no chance of bias by its very nature, but anytime power is vested outside that system, there's that potential.

[Croc]

3: Players
3.1: Definition
- a Player is defined as a participant in a water war
- all Players must be accounted for prior to the start of game
3.2: General Rules
- Players should not change teams unless both teams agree on the change
- Players are never permitted to aggressively physically come in contact with another Player for any reason
- Non-Players and Referees/Moderators are considered non-combatants and thus must not be attacked or provoked in any way
- Non-Players cannot provoke players to hit them

[isoaker]

@Duxburian: great additions! for the dispute part, I pushed your recommendation into Option B and pushed down the Referee one as Option C. In term of Referees, the hope is that the Referee is a person who is trusted by all participating Team Commanders, thus would have the final say in a dispute, of course, only if Referees were being used in the first place. I does place a huge amount of power with the Referee, but that is true in all sports with Referees that I can think of. The Referee is supposed to be objective, impartial, and fair.

[DX]

Over the past 2 months, I ran a Dart Wars competition at my school. During some shootouts, teams designated a ref. Even when agreed upon by both sides, refs were usually totally biased, even if they kept it well hidden. There were no disputes whenever I showed up to moderate, however, since I had to be 110% impartial and everyone knew it. That experience shows that if you are going to have a ref, he/she should have strong relations with no one on either side. It should be someone you know and trust, but not someone you know so well that they might develop a vested interest in the outcome.

[isoaker]

Updated: 20070213.

[isoaker]

Thread closed now that first version of full rule set now posted onto iSoaker.com.